PARENTS UNITEDS ANNUAL FALL MEETING &
ADVOCACY AWARDS PRESENTATION

Come out and participate in our annual salute to school advocacy, and meet
Superintendent Arlene Ackerman. If you have questions that are not getting answered,
here's your opportunity to go right to the top. Hors d'oeuvres and drinks will be served
starting at 6: 30 pm; the meeting will begin promptly at 7:00. To help us know how many
people will be attending, please call us at 202-518-3667 if you plan to come.

This past year, Superintendent Ackerman set six performance targets for schools to
improve their Stanford 9 scores. Those targets were to raise the percentage of students
scoring below basic to basic by 10%; to raise the percentage of basic to proficient by
10%; and to raise the percentage of proficient to advanced by 5% in Math and Reading.
Seven schools met all six targets: Birney, Brent, Browne JHS, Burroughs, Reed, Seaton and
Turner. These seven schools will receive a $15,000 bonus payment into their DAPS accounts.
Adams, JF Cook, Dunbar Pre-Engineering HS, Garnet-Patterson MS, Green, P.R. Harris, Ludlow
Taylor, Payne, Raymond, Takoma and West met five of the six targets. They will each
receive $7,500 extra in their DAPS accounts. The schools that met four of the performance
targets are: Bancroft, Bell MCHS, Hardy MS, Hine JHS, Kramer MS, Meyer, Park View,
Patterson, Ross, School Without Walls SHS, Shepherd, Wheatley, Woodson Business and
Finance, and Young and will receive $3,750 extra in their DAPS accounts.

Schools that failed to meet the benchmark targets must submit a plan for improvement.
The plan must address three issues: 1) how principal and staff will use the test data to
move students into all of the performance levels; 2) what the principal, as instructional
leader will do to improve the quality of instruction in your school; 3) what measurements
(other than grades) the school will use to assess student progress on a quarterly basis.

PROBLEMS WITH THE METHODOLOGY OF USING THE STANFORD 9
SCORES FOR EVALUATING PERFORMANCE OF PRINCIPALS By Kevin Finneran, Chairman, Horace Mann LSRT

Although it makes sense to use student performance on the Stanford 9 as one measure of
principal performance, we must be careful to understand the limits of this metric and to
make sure that it is used equitably for all principals. There are some serious
deficiencies in the way that it is now being used.

The most obvious problem, is that it is not comparing the same group of students from
year to year. This is particularly true when dealing with a small number of students. At
Horace Mann for example, there were only two students with below basic scores in 1998. In
1999, both of these students achieved scores of basic or better a success rate of 100%.
However, two new students entered Mann during the Spring 1999 term, both with below basic
scores. Mann ended the year with a success rate of 0%. The year-to-year comparison is thus
completely misleading.

A second problem with comparing the numbers of students in the four broad categories is
that the categories are so broad. A student who moves from the low and almost to the
cutoff of basic has improved greatly, but the school gets no credit at all.

There is a more sensible and equitable way to use the Stanford 9 scores to measure
progress of all students. Look at the change in scaled score from year to year. It doesn't
matter if a student is high or low on the scale, the change will indicate how much the
student has advanced in one year. A transfer student who is way below basic might gain 40
points in scaled score in a new school (very good progress) and still be below basic. This
would be reflected as the success, not failure as it is set up now. Likewise, students who
are high in the advanced category might rise even higher above the standard. This would be
reflected in the gain in scale score.

The goal is to see how much progress each individual student makes in a year. The
change in the scaled score is the best way to measure this. By looking at the scores of
first graders, we can see that family social and economic status make a big difference in
where children begin. Schools can't do much about that. But schools should be able to do
something once a child is enrolled. They can't overcome all the nonschool factors, but all
schools should be able to show steady development in all students. The change in scaled
score is the measure of that development.

Cohousing communities are small-scale neighborhoods that provide a new kind of balance
between personal privacy and living amidst people who know and care about each other?
Individual dwelling units enjoy convenient access to shared space including "a common
house" with facilities such as a dining room, a play room for children, workshops and
a sitting area or library.

It takes a village to raise a child...TAKOMA VILLAGE COHOUSING

A caring, child-friendly community of reasonably priced, privately-owned
homes with shared common space.
One and a half blocks from Takoma Metro.
For information call Ann Zabaldo at (202) 546-4654

Last year the DC Council enacted the Uniform Per Student Funding Formula, which was
supposed to fund public schools predictably and fairly based on enrollment and student
needs by grade level, special education and need for ESL instruction. The formula funds
DCPS based on the previous year's audited enrollment and public charter schools based on
their current year enrollment. (This is not to be confused with the school system's
weighted student formula used by DCPS to allocate money to each school.)

The DCPS operating budget for the year now starting should have been $627 million -
$526 million generated by the formula plus $101 million non-formula for
"state-level" costs of transportation and private school tuition for special
education students not served within the school system. The latter include severely
handicapped children in residential placements and DC children in foster care outside DC,
responsibility for whom was recently shifted to DCPS by the DC government.

The Council, Mayor, Control Board and now Congress have seemingly appropriated $601
million  $26 million less than the request. Rather than change the formula, they
decided the non-formula special education allocation would be only $75 million. But the
school system is more likely to get only $571 million. Public charter school enrollment is
expected to rise by several thousand in the fall, but the Mayor, Council and Control Board
did not want to fund the increase. So in a separate "Budget Support" act, the
Council is withholding 5% of the DCPS budget  $30 million  until enrollment
counts are in and DC residency validated (this could take until December). The $30 million
will then be "apportioned" between DCPS and public charters, presumably in such
a way that per student funding is equal at some unknown level. Since the public charters
are underfunded by millions of dollars, DCPS will get little if any of its $30 million
back. In addition, the tuition and transportation costs for special education have to be
paid. If they cost the full $101 million, funds are likely to be taken from other programs
inside DCPS.

The District's 1999 bond issue to pay for major repairs, renovations and construction
gives the DC Public Schools $11 million less than their entitlement under the 1997
agreement ending Parents United's law suit to enforce the fire code. The District is
raising $240 M to pay for such projects as school building roofs, street repair and
traffic lights, new financial systems and police computers and facilities. DCPS is to
receive $55 M, while under the fire code settlement, schools are entitled to 27.5% of
long- term financing or $66 M. Since we all know that our crumbling school buildings need
more than the additional $11 M, Parents United's pro bono lawyers are pursuing this issue.

We are delighted that DC's bond rating is good enough at the BBB level (AAA is highest)
to permit $240 M worth of new projects. But students, staff end parents suffered severe
disruptions including a three week delay in the start of school in 1997 to get their 27.5%
share, and we want them to have it.

Kinship care givers  grandparents and others raising children of relatives and
neighbors  can now register these students under a new agreement with DCPS reached
with the help of Steptoe & Johnson, the same firm that handled our fire code case. The
school system decided that the Control Board's 1998 rules for proving DC residence meant
that only those with legal custody could register a child. They promised for months to ask
the Control Board to change the rule but never did, and schools have been turning these
children away.

The D.C. Code actually requires that anyone with custody or control of a school-age
child, including temporary residents, must keep the child in regular attendance at school
under threat of jail and fines. It also says that if a DC resident provides evidence that
he/she provides "care, custody and substantial support" to a child living with
him/her and that the parent or legal guardian is unable to do this, the child is to be
considered a resident of DC for purposes of school attendance.

Kinship care givers should go to Room 7115 (the Tuition Office, also called the
Division of Student Residency, tel: 202-442-5215) at DCPS headquarters at 825 North
Capitol St., NE to fill out and file a tuition exemption form, which will be processed
immediately. They can then bring the completed form to the school, where the principal is
required to enroll the child. We salute the work of Barbara Kagan, a DCPS parent and
attorney, who has offered her services to the kinship care coalition and individual
grandmothers.

The DC Council recently passed a law requiring schools to keep copies of documents
parents present to prove they are DC residents. These documents include (1) your DC tax
return or current pay stub or proof you receive public assistance and (2) two of the
following  DC driver's license, DC vehicle registration, voter registration, title
to DC residential property, current lease agreement and receipt of rent payment, utility
bill and paid receipt. Last year when some schools asked for copies of these documents to
keep, parents protested and the Superintendent told schools not to keep copies, just to
certify that they inspected them. Now the Council says that schools have to keep copies.
If you think this is an invasion of your privacy, you should (1) black out any private
information on the copy the school keeps and (2) complain to your council members (your
ward and the five at-large!).

School Climate (10 points) includes safe and effective climate, management of the
facility, site visit/school climate and student survey results.

Leadership (15 points) includes instructional leadership, special education, timely and
accurate submission of reports, bilingual/ESL programs, proof of residency verification;
and professional growth and participation.

Parent and Community Involvement (5 points) includes home/school communication, use of
community resources, procedures to address parent comments, Parent involvement in school
operations and governance, special activities, parent survey.

Human Resources Management (15 points) includes Evaluation of all staff, staffing
practices, ongoing local school staff development in team building, empowerment, staff
attendance, awards, and staff survey.

The Superintendent did use some discretion in evaluating principals this year by
recognizing incremental growth and progress. Factors in deciding the evaluation included:
A) Did the school's test scores improve in 1999? B) Did the principal receive a rating of
satisfactory or better in 1997/98? C) Did performance criteria in areas other than
Stanford-9 scores total more than 35? Principals who answered yes to the above questions
received a rating of satisfactory and a one year appointment. For other principals,
Ackerman reviewed all performance data on an individual basis before deciding to
reappoint.

Schools known for high performance levels that did not move enough students up in test
achievement received no credit for high scores. Ackerman seems to be saying that every
school's job is to raise test scores for all students.

FAMILIES AND FRIENDS OF SPECIAL CHILDREN INVITES YOU
TO OUR FIRST ANNUAL BACK IN SCHOOL COOK OUT!
WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 15, 1999, 9:00 AM - 2:30 PM
BRING A DISH AND/OR DONATION

also

COME TO A TOWN HALL MEETING FOR THE SPECIAL EDUCATION COMMUNITYWITH SCHOOL AND CITY OFFICIALS - THURSDAY, OCTOBER 21, 1999
DINNER AT 6:00 (first come, first served)
TOWN HALL MEETING 7:00 - 9:00 PM - LOCATION TO BE ANNOUNCED

FOR MORE INFORMATION ON BOTH EVENTS CONTACT:
SISTER SHEMAYAH AT 202 529-0254 OR
MICHELLE AT 202 939-0555

Parents United has been concerned for some time that the elected Board would
self-destruct at the time that parents wanted to see it reappear as an elected body
accountable to the public to upgrade the quality of education in our city. To regain its
authority requires convincing the appointed Control Board that they can run our schools
effectively without the fractious contention that marked its past, and now again, its
present.

The elected Board of Education voting 6 to 5 recently, removed Wilma Harvey as
President of the Board. As Vice President, Dwight Singleton then became president. After
intense intervention by Council member Kevin Chavous, Chair of the Council Committee on
Education and Libraries, Harvey was reinstated with a strong Executive Committee that must
approve her actions.

Those opposing Harvey cited her failure to inform the Board sufficiently of
deliberations with the Board of Trustees, acting for the whole Board without consulting
it, slow progress developing the transition plan and using Board staff for personal
purposes. Those voting to retain Harvey cited lack of due-process in the decision to
remove her, and no rules governing the removal of a president. Members of both groups cite
the other group as wanting to remove the superintendent, and as jeopardizing the return of
the Board's authority.

During the last three years, the group with authority, the appointed Board of Trustees,
has had no need to listen to the public and offered us few opportunities to address them
with our concerns. It has been a difficult period for activists. While many of the
initiatives of the Superintendent have been admirable and some successful, it is time for
parents to have direct access to policy makers. It is time for the public to be able to
help the Superintendent assess the success of her initiatives and to be able to believe
that those actions that should change, will change. Parents United wanted the elected
Board to show its commitment to monitoring the success of our schools, not fighting over
who is in charge of a paper tiger. The District seems to be starting a serious discussion
about how our schools should be governed. There is discussion in the media, a citizens
forum at UDC on August 19th, a report forthcoming from the DC Appleseed Foundation based
on research and interviews and City Council hearings to be announced later. We urge
everyone to tell our elected representatives and the press how we must have elected
responsive governance of our schools and soon.

Parents United has worked hard to advocate for upgraded academic achievement in our
system. The Ackerman administration seems to be committed to the same, but how do we do
it? Some phone calls to our office suggest that DCPS' new appraisal systems are
discouraging good teachers.

Scenario. You are a reading/history teacher making an all out effort in a low
performing school. Your class is doing well, scores are up, you get citations by
professional organizations, people come to visit your classroom as a model that works.
Your students do special projects.

You enter the principal's evaluation meeting ready for acknowledgment of your efforts.
Instead, since the entire school's average reading score is low, you get few points for
your own classes' success. Furthermore, since your principal made all teachers (including
English/social studies) responsible for raising math and reading scores and your classes'
math scores are mediocre, your total performance is further downgraded.

What to do to get a better rating next year? You can get out of that school into one
with better prepared math students so you can focus on the English that you know how to
teach? Shock! You cannot transfer to another school until all excessed English/social
studies teachers in the system are placed in schools. That is unlikely to happen before
school starts so you are stuck, discouraged and at a loss. Or, you can leave DCPS
altogether and go to a school system that rewards your abilities - a lot of our good
teachers are doing just that.

Is there any value to this system? Yes, I've heard that collective responsibility is a
successful management tool. If the class cut-up keeps the rest of the students from going
on a field trip, soon the other students will force the cut-up to behave. Maybe it will
work here. If math is the English/social studies teachers' downfall (indeed, the downfall
of all teachers since every subject teacher is evaluated on the math and English SAT-9
score structure), the entire staff will force the math department to help them teach math
in their curriculum. Maybe! Or maybe the entire staff will feel betrayed the way residents
of villages in a war feel when armies destroy an entire village in retaliation for sniper
fire they cannot control.

We have other alternatives as well. Selective schools can refuse to take any students
whose scores they do not want to deal with. Since ten percent of our students attend
schools through special permission, we do a lot of "shopping around" for
quality. If we can't shop, parents who want better quality schools will leave for
charters, private schools or continue to leave the city. It is already difficult to get
into some of our schools. This "test scores up or die" system can make it even
more difficult and more discriminatory.

Parents United received a call in April from a parent who had just discovered that it
was too late for her child to apply to colleges. Since no one in her family had ever
attended college, this parent had no idea about the time frame for applications or the
tests that schools want students to have taken, the financial aid forms that parents must
submit  she knew nothing. It is absolutely imperative for High School counselors to
keep students and their parents informed on the college application process. We have
developed a college preparation time-line (with great assistance from Eleanor Oliver from
Wilson High School's college bureau). If you would like a copy. send us a note with a
self-addressed stamped envelope and we'll send it out to you. If you have a high
school (or even a junior high school) student in your house, it's never too early to start
thinking about the college process.

COUNCILMEMBER KEVIN P. CHAVOUS,
CHAIRMANCommittee on Education, Libraries and Recreation will hold
A Two-part Oversight Hearing onPARENTAL INVOLVEMENT IN LOCAL SCHOOLS4:00 PM
AND AHearing of the Special Council Committee on Special Education:INVOLVEMENT OF PARENTS OF SPECIAL NEEDS STUDENTS6:00 PMBoth on Tuesday, September 28, 1999Francis Junior High School
(2425 N St., NW)

When principals and parents cannot reach a consensus on the Weighted Student Formula
and on how to spend the resources going into the school, no one will be happy with the
result. In four schools that reached an impasse, the school system's administration sent
in an outside mediator. When that did not work, the administration convened an outside
team to write the school's plan. Only one parent was allowed to participate and the
principal was totally excluded.

During a meeting of the Governance Committee for restructuring, principals on the
committee were horrified that the principal could not develop the plan that they, as
principal, would have to implement. Parents were equally horrified that only one parent
was allowed to participate.

If you believe that schools improve best when parents, teachers and principal are
working in harmony to achieve high quality learning, Parents United suggests that the LSRT
find ways to work together harmoniously. The school system will have a plan from your
school. The stakeholders must work together if they are to produce that plan themselves.

Please note the change  it's in the second semester! Our Winter newsletter
will list the special programs available in the system that you might want for your child.
Charter schools have their own process. We have a list of Charter schools, but the most
up-to-date information can be gotten from the Charter School Resource Center. Call them at
202 835-9011 for more information.